Judge again rules Ashley Judd can’t sue Harvey Weinstein under updated sex pest law but still can pursue defamation claim

January 10, 2019

Harvey Weinstein (L) and actress Ashley Judd remain locked in a legal battle over Judd’s claims the movie producer defamed her to “Lord of The Rings” director Peter Jackson and destroyed her chance of landing a role in the fantasy franchise. (YANN COATSALIOU/AFP/Getty Images, Roy Rochlin/Getty Images for Tribeca Film Festival)

For the second time in four months, a judge has dismissed Ashley Judd’s sexual harassment claim against Harvey Weinstein and said the actress may proceed to trial with separate allegations of defamation and economic interference.

U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez first dismissed the sex pest claim in September but gave Judd a chance to re-file her lawsuit with new information supporting her right to sue under a revitalized state law governing harassment in professional relationships.

Advertisement

She filed an amended complaint Oct. 19, but Weinstein argued it still wasn’t sufficient.

Judge Gutierrez ruled Wednesday in Weinstein’s favor.

“The court concludes that amendment’s explicit inclusion of producers expanded the reach of (the original statute) rather than merely clarifying it,” Judge Gutierrez wrote.

Consequently, the amendment cannot be applied retroactively to Judd’s claims, he decided.

Judd filed the Los Angeles-based civil lawsuit back in April, claiming Weinstein defamed her to “Lord of the Rings” director Peter Jackson in or around 1998 after she allegedly rejected Weinstein’s sexual advances in a Beverly Hills hotel room a year or two earlier.

Judd argued the trash-talking caused a domino effect in her career because Jackson was considering her for a major “Rings” role but removed her from consideration based on Weinstein’s words.

She argued that a role in the billion-dollar fantasy franchise likely would have led to other high-profile opportunities and paid dividends for decades.

In her complaint, Judd detailed the alleged sexual harassment. She said Weinstein lured her to a suite of the Peninsula Beverly Hills hotel under the guise of a business meeting in 1996 or 1997 and then unexpectedly stripped naked before asking her to engage in massage and watch him shower.

She said it wasn’t until after she stepped forward in a 2017 New York Times exposé about the hotel incident that she learned Weinstein allegedly badmouthed her to Jackson.

Jackson blew the whistle when he gave an interview in December 2017, saying he was close to casting Judd in “Lord of the Rings” but passed her over “as a direct result” of “false information” he received from Miramax regarding both Judd and fellow actress Mira Sorvino, another Weinstein accuser.

“I recall Miramax telling us they were a nightmare to work with and we should avoid them at all costs,” Jackson told Stuff.

“At the time, we had no reason to question what these guys were telling us, but in hindsight, I realize that this was very likely the Miramax smear campaign in full swing,” he said.

Judd’s lawyer said late Wednesday that Judd will continue full steam ahead with her remaining claims against Weinstein.

“Nothing about today’s ruling changes that Ms. Judd’s case is moving forward on multiple claims. The court today dismissed only one of Ms. Judd’s four claims for relief. In doing so, it made clear that it was not determining whether Ms. Judd was sexually harassed in the colloquial sense of the term,” lawyer Theodore J. Boutrous Jr. said in a statement to the Daily News.

Advertisement

“While we respectfully disagree with the court’s decision as to the one claim it ruled on today, we look forward to pursuing the three claims for relief that the court has already ruled can move forward,” he said.

Earlier this week, Weinstein, 66, filed a motion asking Judge Gutierrez to put the case on hold pending the outcome of his criminal prosecution in Manhattan.

The pariah producer was arrested in New York on May 25 and later indicted on charges he raped one woman in 2013 and forced another woman to perform oral sex on him during a separate incident.

The Manhattan District Attorney filed additional charges July 2 alleging Weinstein raped a third woman.

Weinstein also is the target of acting criminal investigations being conducted by the Southern District of New York, the Los Angeles County District Attorney and authorities in London, according to his Monday motion.

“It is well-settled that a civil action should be stayed pending a related criminal action involving similar conduct where the defendant risks incrimination,” Weinstein’s lawyers argued in their motion of the stay.

“If a stay is not granted, Weinstein will be forced to invoke his Fifth Amendment rights, thus rendering him unable to defend himself in the civil matter,” the paperwork argued.

“In the absence of a stay, this action unfairly burdens Weinstein’s constitutional rights to defend himself against the criminal charges and will potentially interfere with a criminal prosecution,” the filing claimed.